Will a Multi-Vitamin help with PE

This is coming to America in the form of the proposed FDA regulations I linked earlier. With this I am done, you guys can believe whatever you want. Pharmaceutical companies are actively working to eliminate supplements that threaten their money makers, their patented formulas. They buy them out, regulate them out, or fund research to discredit them. I could give you a natural remedy to almost anything you can name that works and doesn’t cause a ton of unwanted side effects. Vitamins and minerals are the building blocks of your body and you somehow see insuring your daily needs are met as a waste. The propaganda machine works, I truly regret I couldn’t help you see past it.

None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you.. YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!

~Rorschach

04-30-2014, 04:58 AM

ilovetacos

With all do respect, I would want a second opinion on supplements and what American scientist’s say is good and not good even Canadian scientists for that matter. There all to scared to recommend something or even nature herbs because they don’t wanna lose money and want you to take there chemicals. Watch Dallas buyers club you’ll get what I mean , the guy had to go to Mexico to find medicine that worked and the FDA didn’t approve. LOL There no harm in trying a multivitamin it works or it don’t.

04-30-2014, 07:29 AM

marinera

Vitamin D is not a vitamin but a hormone. It is unique in that it is made in the skin as a result of exposure to sunlight. Photosynthesis of vitamin D has been occurring on earth for more than 750 million years. Some of the earliest life forms that were exposed to sunlight for their energy requirement were also photosynthesizing vitamin D.

…………

Exposure of a person in a bathing suit to a minimal erythemal dose of sunlight, which is typically no more than 15-20 minutes on Cape Cod in June or July at noon time, is the equivalent to taking 20,000 IU of vitamin D orally.

…….

Is there any advantage to being exposed to sunlight to produce vitamin D rather than taking a pill that contains an adequate amount, i.e., 1,000 IU of vitamin D3 It is known that when exposed to sunlight the vitamin D that’s made in the skin enters the dermal capillary bed, and essentially 100% is bound to the vitamin D binding protein. When vitamin D is ingested, it is incorporated into the chylomicrons and is transported through the lymphatic system, which in turn, is deposited into the venous system where it eventually is metabolized in the liver to 25-hydroxyvitamin D. As a result, no more than 60% of the vitamin D that is ingested is bound to the vitamin D binding protein, whereas the other 40% is mostly bound to lipoproteins. Thus, the vitamin D that is made in the skin has a longer half-life in the circulation than it does when ingested from the diet or from a supplement.

Furthermore, the vitamin D produced in the skin from sun exposure is free, unlike a vitamin D supplement. You can never become vitamin D intoxicated from sun exposure, but you can if you take too many vitamin D pills.

The very high levels of vitamin D that are often recommended by doctors and testing laboratories — and can be achieved only by taking supplements — are unnecessary and could be harmful, an expert committee says. It also concludes that calcium supplements are not needed.

The very high levels of vitamin D that are often recommended by doctors and testing laboratories — and can be achieved only by taking supplements — are unnecessary and could be harmful, an expert committee says. It also concludes that calcium supplements are not needed.

…

At the same time, vitamin D sales have soared, growing faster than those of any supplement, according to The Nutrition Business Journal. Sales rose 82 percent from 2008 to 2009, reaching $430 million. “Everyone was hoping vitamin D would be kind of a panacea,” Dr. Black said. The report, he added, might quell the craze.

“I think this will have an impact on a lot of primary care providers,” he said.

The 14-member expert committee was convened by the Institute of Medicine, an independent nonprofit scientific body, at the request of the United States and Canadian governments. It was asked to examine the available data — nearly 1,000 publications — to determine how much vitamin D and calcium people were getting, how much was needed for optimal health and how much was too much.

……..Studies showing the negative or null effects of vitamins supplements are so common that it is surprising doctors still find these studies to be surprising. Vitamins are not as simple as A-B-C. The latest bit of confusion appears in the April 27 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. Doctors in Australia provided nearly 1,900 pregnant women with either supplements of vitamins C and E or a placebo to see whether the vitamins would lower the risk of developing high blood pressure during pregnancy. It didn\’t work.

Surprisingly, the doctors said, the vitamin group had a slightly higher rate of high blood pressure compared to the placebo group.

…

But we love our vitamins.

Americans spend about $2 billion a year on vitamins C and E, along with beta carotene (a precursor of vitamin A) and selenium, according to Nutrition Business Journal. These are the most popular antioxidants, a class of chemicals said to cure just about everything.

The trouble is, science can't seem to support the bad movie script created by the vitamin supplement industry…..

[i]Three articles in this issue address the role of vitamin and mineral supplements for preventing the occurrence or progression of chronic diseases.

First, Fortmann and colleagues (1) systematically reviewed trial evidence to update the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on the efficacy of vitamin supplements for primary prevention in community-dwelling adults with no nutritional deficiencies. After reviewing 3 trials of multivitamin supplements and 24 trials of single or paired vitamins that randomly assigned more than 400 000 participants, the authors concluded that there was no clear evidence of a beneficial effect of supplements on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, or cancer.

Second, Grodstein and coworkers (2) evaluated the efficacy of a daily multivitamin to prevent cognitive decline among 5947 men aged 65 years or older participating in the Physicians’ Health Study II. After 12 years of follow-up, there were no differences between the multivitamin and placebo groups in overall cognitive performance or verbal memory.

Adherence to the intervention was high, and the large sample size resulted in precise estimates showing that use of a multivitamin supplement in a well-nourished elderly population did not prevent cognitive decline. Grodstein and coworkers’ findings are compatible with a recent review (3) of 12 fair- to good-quality trials that evaluated dietary supplements, including multivitamins, B vitamins, vitamins E and C, and omega-3 fatty acids, in persons with mild cognitive impairment or mild to moderate dementia. None of the supplements improved cognitive function.

Third, Lamas and associates (4) assessed the potential benefits of a high-dose, 28-component multivitamin supplement in 1708 men and women with a previous myocardial infarction participating in TACT (Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy). After a median follow-up of 4.6 years, there was no significant difference in recurrent cardiovascular events with multivitamins compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.07]). The trial was limited by high rates of nonadherence and dropouts.

Other reviews and guidelines that have appraised the role of vitamin and mineral supplements in primary or secondary prevention of chronic disease have consistently found null results or possible harms (5–6). Evidence involving tens of thousands of people randomly assigned in many clinical trials shows that β-carotene, vitamin E, and possibly high doses of vitamin A supplements increase mortality (6–7) and that other antioxidants (6), folic acid and B vitamins (8), and multivitamin supplements (1, 5) have no clear benefit.

Despite sobering evidence of no benefit or possible harm, use of multivitamin supplements increased among U.S. adults from 30% between 1988 to 1994 to 39% between 2003 to 2006, while overall use of dietary supplements increased from 42% to 53% (9).

I’m always baffled by the way many of these studies go about investigating the effect of supplementation. A multivitamin is designed to do one thing: raise the levels of vitamins/minerals in your body. The first step should be to ascertain whether this actually happens. But most studies jump the gun and go straight to a comparison to certain very specific health issues. In doing so, they lose control of their variables. It’s just bad research. And it’s a great illustration of why the majority of published “scientific” work is laughable (note: I’m a physicist and it’s also quite prevalent in my field, though definitely not as much as in medicine and biology).

From a scientific standpoint, the connection between supplementation and disease, and the direct effect a multivitamin has on the body are two very separate topics. I think (though I haven’t tried) you’d be hard pressed to find a study that shows absolutely no change in low vitamin blood levels after a period of supplementation.

04-30-2014, 09:58 AM

marinera

Although that is a good point, unfortunately not necessarily a higher level in the blood means always the same thing, because the body has a complex system of reactions. If you inject vitamins in your blood, for example, for sure there will be an higher level; but what effects that will have compared to the same level coming from just food?

04-30-2014, 01:40 PM

Mirthandirxiii

Originally Posted by marinera

Vitamin D is not a vitamin but a hormone. It is unique in that it is made in the skin as a result of exposure to sunlight. Photosynthesis of vitamin D has been occurring on earth for more than 750 million years. Some of the earliest life forms that were exposed to sunlight for their energy requirement were also photosynthesizing vitamin D. …………Exposure of a person in a bathing suit to a minimal erythemal dose of sunlight, which is typically no more than 15-20 minutes on Cape Cod in June or July at noon time, is the equivalent to taking 20,000 IU of vitamin D orally. ……. Is there any advantage to being exposed to sunlight to produce vitamin D rather than taking a pill that contains an adequate amount, i.e., 1,000 IU of vitamin D3 It is known that when exposed to sunlight the vitamin D that’s made in the skin enters the dermal capillary bed, and essentially 100% is bound to the vitamin D binding protein. When vitamin D is ingested, it is incorporated into the chylomicrons and is transported through the lymphatic system, which in turn, is deposited into the venous system where it eventually is metabolized in the liver to 25-hydroxyvitamin D. As a result, no more than 60% of the vitamin D that is ingested is bound to the vitamin D binding protein, whereas the other 40% is mostly bound to lipoproteins. Thus, the vitamin D that is made in the skin has a longer half-life in the circulation than it does when ingested from the diet or from a supplement.

Furthermore, the vitamin D produced in the skin from sun exposure is free, unlike a vitamin D supplement. You can never become vitamin D intoxicated from sun exposure, but you can if you take too many vitamin D pills.

I cannot resist. The above quote is from Dr. Michael Holick. Here is another quote from Dr. Holick.

“Do you recommend 1000 IU/day in both summer and winter?

Response: I recommend that everyone take 1,000 IU of vitamin D/d along with a multivitamin containing 400 IU of vitamin D/d both in the winter and summer. This will not cause any build up of vitamin D in the body and by using this as a routine, you are less likely to forget it in the winter time.”

Here is a list of medical conditions this leader in the field associates with inadequate vitamin D.Arthritis, cancer, obesity, multiple sclerosis, osteoporosis, osteomalacea and possible links to many others.

None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you.. YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!

~Rorschach

04-30-2014, 03:32 PM

Mirthandirxiii

Originally Posted by Serenity73

I’m always baffled by the way many of these studies go about investigating the effect of supplementation. A multivitamin is designed to do one thing: raise the levels of vitamins/minerals in your body. The first step should be to ascertain whether this actually happens. But most studies jump the gun and go straight to a comparison to certain very specific health issues. In doing so, they lose control of their variables. It’s just bad research. And it’s a great illustration of why the majority of published “scientific” work is laughable (note: I’m a physicist and it’s also quite prevalent in my field, though definitely not as much as in medicine and biology).

From a scientific standpoint, the connection between supplementation and disease, and the direct effect a multivitamin has on the body are two very separate topics. I think (though I haven’t tried) you’d be hard pressed to find a study that shows absolutely no change in low vitamin blood levels after a period of supplementation.

I agree that a direct connection between supplementation and absorption should be established as a basic starting point when studying the effects of supplementation on health. I do however point out that many studies do effectively track the blood concentration with pre supplement values as the baseline. That being said the effective absorption rate can be extrapolated from the data.

Bearing that in mind, it must however be noted that the incredible complexity of biochemistry precludes elimination of all variables. Genetic variation alone is enough to make studies of this sort problematic at best. Add to that free will and you have a receipt for inconclusive results. Without a few hundred clones in a controlled environment to work with human studies of this sort often yield hard to qualify results. Therefore they are easily manipulated to fit preconceived notions whether intentionally or not.

On a side note do you mind if I ask what your particular field of study is?

None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you.. YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!

~Rorschach

04-30-2014, 04:36 PM

marinera

I find your arguing pretty hilarious bro. He recommends that amount but he says that you don’t need pills to get them, a brief exposure to the sun is a better way.; he also say that vitamin D supplementation is dangerous.

Anyway I see that you have no intention to look at this with the slightest amount of rationality so I’ll leave you to your blind faith, good luck.

04-30-2014, 04:47 PM

Serenity73

Originally Posted by Mirthandirxiii

I agree that a direct connection between supplementation and absorption should be established as a basic starting point when studying the effects of supplementation on health. I do however point out that many studies do effectively track the blood concentration with pre supplement values as the baseline. That being said the effective absorption rate can be extrapolated from the data.

Fair enough. Admittedly, my aggression may have been slightly misplaced in my first post.

Originally Posted by Mirthandirxiii

Bearing that in mind, it must however be noted that the incredible complexity of biochemistry precludes elimination of all variables. Genetic variation alone is enough to make studies of this sort problematic at best. Add to that free will and you have a receipt for inconclusive results. Without a few hundred clones in a controlled environment to work with human studies of this sort often yield hard to qualify results. Therefore they are easily manipulated to fit preconceived notions whether intentionally or not.

On a side note do you mind if I ask what your particular field of study is?

Very true, of course.My main thing is: if a multivitamin raises vitamin/mineral levels in the body then it’s nonsense to conclude that it’s a waste, regardless if any clear difference in mortality is seen or not. The range of possible outcomes is simply too wide.

I work with biophysics (some optical, mostly complex systems).

04-30-2014, 05:06 PM

Mirthandirxiii

Originally Posted by marinera

I find your arguing pretty hilarious bro. He recommends that amount but he says that you don’t need pills to get them, a brief exposure to the sun is a better way.; he also say that vitamin D supplementation is dangerous.

Anyway I see that you have no intention to look at this with the slightest amount of rationality so I’ll leave you to your blind faith, good luck.

“I recommend that everyone take 1,000 IU of vitamin D/d along with a multivitamin containing 400 IU of vitamin D/d both in the winter and summer. This will not cause any build up of vitamin D in the body and by using this as a routine, you are less likely to forget it in the winter time.”

These are his exact words from the same website you linked to. I have been checking your references and have listed many more than you supporting my argument. How do you perceive this as blind faith is beyond me. I have established need, with your help, for several vitamins and minerals among a large percentage of the population. To say I have blind faith even after producing the evidence you asked for is a bit insulting. A difference of opinion I can respect but it is not blind faith.

None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you.. YOU'RE LOCKED IN HERE WITH ME!

~Rorschach

04-30-2014, 05:09 PM

marinera

IMHO ain’t that simple, Serenity, For example vitamin D supplementation was shown to raise D levels in (black) Africans but not in whites; in both cases had no effects on calcium absorption though (the latter finding is consistent in several studies)*. Physics is a simpler field than medicine.

*I have not the studies under-hand neither I can search right now, but google should show the abstracts quickly if you are interested.

Last edited by marinera : 04-30-2014 at 05:27 PM.

05-01-2014, 03:13 PM

Mirthandirxiii

[QUOTE=marinera]

Vitamin D is not a vitamin but a hormone. It is unique in that it is made in the skin as a result of exposure to sunlight. Photosynthesis of vitamin D has been occurring on earth for more than 750 million years. Some of the earliest life forms that were exposed to sunlight for their energy requirement were also photosynthesizing vitamin D.

…………

Exposure of a person in a bathing suit to a minimal erythemal dose of sunlight, which is typically no more than 15-20 minutes on Cape Cod in June or July at noon time, is the equivalent to taking 20,000 IU of vitamin D orally.

…….

Is there any advantage to being exposed to sunlight to produce vitamin D rather than taking a pill that contains an adequate amount, i.e., 1,000 IU of vitamin D3 It is known that when exposed to sunlight the vitamin D that’s made in the skin enters the dermal capillary bed, and essentially 100% is bound to the vitamin D binding protein. When vitamin D is ingested, it is incorporated into the chylomicrons and is transported through the lymphatic system, which in turn, is deposited into the venous system where it eventually is metabolized in the liver to 25-hydroxyvitamin D. As a result, no more than 60% of the vitamin D that is ingested is bound to the vitamin D binding protein, whereas the other 40% is mostly bound to lipoproteins. Thus, the vitamin D that is made in the skin has a longer half-life in the circulation than it does when ingested from the diet or from a supplement.

Furthermore, the vitamin D produced in the skin from sun exposure is free, unlike a vitamin D supplement. You can never become vitamin D intoxicated from sun exposure, but you can if you take too many vitamin D pills.